IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 541 of 2009()
1. RIAS, S/O. ASSANKUTTY
... Petitioner
2. NAVAS, S/O. ASSANKUTTY
3. ASSANKUTTY, S/O. ALIKUTTY
4. KADEESAKUTTY,
Vs
1. SAMEERA, D/O. MARAKKAR,
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
For Respondent :SRI.SAKIR.K.H.
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :12/02/2009
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J
-----------------------
CRL.M.C.No. 541 OF 2009
---------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of February, 2009
O R D E R
This petition is filed with a prayer to quash all further
proceedings in C.C No. 153/2006 on the file of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-V, Kozhikode. The petitioners are facing a
trial under Section 406 and 498 A r/w 34 of the IPC. The dispute
is a matrimonial dispute. An affidavit is filed by the wife who is
the defacto complainant to the effect that the matter has been
settled between the parties and she does not want to prosecute
the case. What shall be the methodology in such type of cases
had been decided by the apex court in the decision reported in
B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana [2003(4) SCC 675]. The
apex court held that while exercising inherent powers under
Section 482 of Crl.P.C, it is for the High Court to take into
consideration any special features which appear in a particular
case to consider whether it is expedient and in the interest of
justice to permit the prosecution to continue. The apex court
also held that the special features in matrimonial cases are
Crl.M.C.No. 541/2009
-2-
evident and it becomes the duty of the court to encourage
genuine settlement of matrimonial disputes and further held that
the hyper technical view would be counter productive if it is not
properly done. Turning to the facts of the present case the
matrimonial dispute between the parties had been settled and
they have decided to separate and live as friends. There is no
point in asking them to litigate when they want a peaceful and
harmonious atmosphere. So the facts and circumstances of this
case would show that this is a proper case where the powers
under Section 482 of the Crl.P.C can be invoked.
Therefore the Crl.M.C is allowed and the entire proceedings
in C.C. 153/2006 pending before the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court -V, Kozhikode is quashed.
M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE
vkm